The man Mike Williams hired probably should have assigned a coach to follow Roman Davis to be sure he went to class and not somewhere else. Now he may be subject to the Jones Act.

BREAKING DOWN 'The Jones Act'The Jones Act was enacted by the United States Congress in order to stimulate the shipping industry in the wake of the First World War. It is considered a protectionist legislation. The law focuses on issues related to maritime commerce, including cabotage, which is the transport of people or goods between ports in the same country. It also provides sailors with additional rights, including the ability to seek damages from the crew, captain or ship owner in the case of injury.

Here is how I see things for the guy Mike Williams hired as MBB "coach" for the upcoming season

. Very Bad Start (on top of everything that has been happening with the team in the last 16 months): Gone before the end of December.

. Bad Start (bottom three in Pac-12): Gone by February (although may not be announced publicly().

. Lower half of Pac-12 After 2-17 Pac-12 Record Last Year (overall Pac-12 record of around 10-28):: Gone when the season ends.

* Middle Upper Half of Pac-12: Depends on the new AD and Chancellor and their priorities.

*Upper 1/3 of Pac-12: Gets a third year.

*17-2 in Pac-12: I will make a $100,000 + donation to the Cal Athletic Department because this guy's overall Pac-12 record has reached .500 (don'tworry about me, my money is very safe, extremely safe).

* Don't worry. This is NOT going to happen.

Go Bears!

That's about right. However, I'd say that your VERY BAD START probably needs to include a serious crisis around cheating, abuse, etc. Not related to on court performance. As for your next two, effectively the same result, but the top of that means going 8-11 this season, which probably moves them into next tier territory.

Middle Upper Half. Here is where it gets interesting. I agree it is unlikely (maybe not impossible). My guess is it really depends on who the AD can find during this time to replace Jones (if he's not looking, then he's not our guy as AD IMHO). If he has someone SIGNIFICANTLY better, I think Jones is gone. If not, Jones stays another year. This is really where a lot of the ranting is silly, because no one has come up with a reasonable alternative. Not that I expect them to, but the AD is paid to find these guys.

I also agree that upper 1/3 and your donation pledge are extremely unlikely.

1. Jones is not going to be fired mid-season unless there's a scandal. IMO, the cost of doing so in terms of the hit to the school's reputation would be greater than the potential gain in terms of either a few wins or the recruiting class.

2. I think you can be confident that Jim has already a list of potential candidates "just in case."

3. Not sure why you would want Jay John as interim coach. I like Jay personally, but he was unsuccessful as a head coach at OSU. Why would he be better here?

4. You make cogent arguments, but your insistence on referring to Coach Jones as "the guy Mike Williams hired" makes you sound like a petulant adolescent and undermines your credibility.

Here is how I see things for the guy Mike Williams hired as MBB "coach" for the upcoming season

. Very Bad Start (on top of everything that has been happening with the team in the last 16 months): Gone before the end of December.

. Bad Start (bottom three in Pac-12): Gone by February (although may not be announced publicly().

. Lower half of Pac-12 After 2-17 Pac-12 Record Last Year (overall Pac-12 record of around 10-28):: Gone when the season ends.

* Middle Upper Half of Pac-12: Depends on the new AD and Chancellor and their priorities.

*Upper 1/3 of Pac-12: Gets a third year.

*17-2 in Pac-12: I will make a $100,000 + donation to the Cal Athletic Department because this guy's overall Pac-12 record has reached .500 (don'tworry about me, my money is very safe, extremely safe).

* Don't worry. This is NOT going to happen.

Go Bears!

That's about right. However, I'd say that your VERY BAD START probably needs to include a serious crisis around cheating, abuse, etc. Not related to on court performance. As for your next two, effectively the same result, but the top of that means going 8-11 this season, which probably moves them into next tier territory.

Middle Upper Half. Here is where it gets interesting. I agree it is unlikely (maybe not impossible). My guess is it really depends on who the AD can find during this time to replace Jones (if he's not looking, then he's not our guy as AD IMHO). If he has someone SIGNIFICANTLY better, I think Jones is gone. If not, Jones stays another year. This is really where a lot of the ranting is silly, because no one has come up with a reasonable alternative. Not that I expect them to, but the AD is paid to find these guys.

I also agree that upper 1/3 and your donation pledge are extremely unlikely.

At the risk of committing the unmentionable sin of quoting my own quote (heretofore the exclusive property of Shlocky and ConcordTom, I believe) . . .

If Wyking DOES pull a rabbit out of a hat and finishes in the top 3rd (I still think calbear80's money is safe), that puts us in an interesting and enviable dilemma. Which of the years was the aberation? The first year dumpster fire where a budding new coach went through some serious teething pain? The second year cinderella story where everything fell into place and a few others fell our way. How much longer do you give Jones to rekindle the magic of year 2, if year three is meh?

This team looks destined to go 5-13 or 6-12 in conference. At that point, whether WJ survives to Year Three will depend on...a) how does recruiting seem to be goingb) how is the esprit de corps of the players on the current roster

If both of the above seem to be strong, we go to Year Three, demanding a better W/L record.

This team looks destined to go 5-13 or 6-12 in conference. At that point, whether WJ survives to Year Three will depend on...a) how does recruiting seem to be goingb) how is the esprit de corps of the players on the current roster

If both of the above seem to be strong, we go to Year Three, demanding a better W/L record.

That seems reasonable and the proper approach. But, as much as I'd like to be wrong, I think that is a strategy for HOPE. Not a strategy for SUCCESS. He should get his year to pull off a miracle and show that he can coach. But so far, the indications are that he is a real nice guy who is not even average at any aspect of collegiate coaching.

Yes, the deck was stacked against him. Yes, he may have been the best that Williams could have gotten. But demanding a better record in year three seems to delay the obvious. He either knows how to build a program (which he has never demonstrated) or he doesn't - which all evidence suggests is the case.

This team looks destined to go 5-13 or 6-12 in conference. At that point, whether WJ survives to Year Three will depend on...a) how does recruiting seem to be goingb) how is the esprit de corps of the players on the current roster

If both of the above seem to be strong, we go to Year Three, demanding a better W/L record.

That seems reasonable and the proper approach. But, as much as I'd like to be wrong, I think that is a strategy for HOPE. Not a strategy for SUCCESS. He should get his year to pull off a miracle and show that he can coach. But so far, the indications are that he is a real nice guy who is not even average at any aspect of collegiate coaching.

Yes, the deck was stacked against him. Yes, he may have been the best that Williams could have gotten. But demanding a better record in year three seems to delay the obvious. He either knows how to build a program (which he has never demonstrated) or he doesn't - which all evidence suggests is the case.

+1

Except, I am not sure about the "real nice guy" part.

Would a "real nice guy" keep $5,000,000 of someone else's money given to him undeservedly by his buddy or would a "real nice guy" give at least some of it back?

Would a "real nice guy" promise a four year college scholarship to a couple of minority high school kids and bring them all the way across the country only to try to take away those scholarships from them less than a year later?

Would a "real nice guy" kick one of the few seniors (another minority) off the team under questionable circumstances without much explanation?

This team looks destined to go 5-13 or 6-12 in conference. At that point, whether WJ survives to Year Three will depend on...a) how does recruiting seem to be goingb) how is the esprit de corps of the players on the current roster

If both of the above seem to be strong, we go to Year Three, demanding a better W/L record.

That seems reasonable and the proper approach. But, as much as I'd like to be wrong, I think that is a strategy for HOPE. Not a strategy for SUCCESS. He should get his year to pull off a miracle and show that he can coach. But so far, the indications are that he is a real nice guy who is not even average at any aspect of collegiate coaching.

Yes, the deck was stacked against him. Yes, he may have been the best that Williams could have gotten. But demanding a better record in year three seems to delay the obvious. He either knows how to build a program (which he has never demonstrated) or he doesn't - which all evidence suggests is the case.

+1

Except, I am not sure about the "real nice guy" part.

Would a "real nice guy" keep $5,000,000 taken from someone else and given to him undeservedly by his buddy or would a "real nice guy" give at least some of it back?

Would a "real nice guy" promise a four year college scholarship to a couple of minority high school kids and bring them all the way across the country only to try to take away those scholarships from them less than a year later?

Would a "real nice guy" kick one of the few seniors (another minority) off the team under questionable circumstances without much explanation?

Go Bears!

This seems a bit much, don't you think? This type of personal attack on Jones undermines your credibility. Your three points would apply to just about any person at or near the top of any organization chart. Also, your facts are a little confusing and seem to indicate your passion has the better of your reason (Which happens to most Cal fans).

This team looks destined to go 5-13 or 6-12 in conference. At that point, whether WJ survives to Year Three will depend on...a) how does recruiting seem to be goingb) how is the esprit de corps of the players on the current roster

If both of the above seem to be strong, we go to Year Three, demanding a better W/L record.

That seems reasonable and the proper approach. But, as much as I'd like to be wrong, I think that is a strategy for HOPE. Not a strategy for SUCCESS. He should get his year to pull off a miracle and show that he can coach. But so far, the indications are that he is a real nice guy who is not even average at any aspect of collegiate coaching.

Yes, the deck was stacked against him. Yes, he may have been the best that Williams could have gotten. But demanding a better record in year three seems to delay the obvious. He either knows how to build a program (which he has never demonstrated) or he doesn't - which all evidence suggests is the case.

+1

Except, I am not sure about the "real nice guy" part.

Would a "real nice guy" keep $5,000,000 taken from someone else and given to him undeservedly by his buddy or would a "real nice guy" give at least some of it back?

Would a "real nice guy" promise a four year college scholarship to a couple of minority high school kids and bring them all the way across the country only to try to take away those scholarships from them less than a year later?

Would a "real nice guy" kick one of the few seniors (another minority) off the team under questionable circumstances without much explanation?

Go Bears!

Damn. Just when I thought you were attempting to be reasonable, you post a bunch of insipid, mean-spirited drivel. To your "points":

Are you really suggesting that in order to be considered nice, a person has to turn down a job or work for free? How do you know that WJ and Williams are "buddies?" Are you privy to their social lives? Or is that just your baseline assumption because both are African American?

What "minority" does Austin McCullough represent? And he never took their scholarships away; in fact, they STILL HAVE THEM.

As for kicking Chauca off the team. The circumstances were such that he should consider himself lucky that he hasn't been prosecuted (yet). And no, Coach Jones does not owe you an explanation. The player in question knows the reason(s) and that's all that matters. Not telling fools like you is a sign of decency on his part.

calbear80 has no credibility to undermine. Each post he makes only serves to confirm that he is a one trick pony with an ax or two to grind. I'm guessing Wyking stole his girlfriend in high school or something.

. 2-17 (worst ever in the California history) in Pac-12. Dead last in Pac-12. Most losses ever in Pac-12. Most losses ever in one season. Most embarrassing double digit losses ever

Enough said.

Bring Back Respect To Cal Basketball!

Go Bears!If you actually want to win basketball games, Wyking Jones was a terrible hire. So much so that I still believe Cal leadership looked at the numbers for basketball and said, "screw it. We'll make more money losing with a bargain basement coach than winning with a coach we have to pay". I believe the current leadership will take a different view and need to make a change after this year. You simply cannot hire an assistant coach who has not demonstrated that he has tried to prepare himself to be a head coach to be head coach of a power conference team. Fans have every right to be upset with Cal's administration. Frankly, I'm not sure Williams had much choice in the matter. I suspect this was a Kapp hire - faced with parameters that were untenable he made a choice out of unacceptable options..

But c'mon man. Making this a moral failing issue is ridiculous. If you think Jones "took away pride and respect" from Cal basketball alone, you are a fool. He inherited a returning roster of Coleman, Davis, Lee, and Okoroh. He did not do that. Did you seriously think Cal was going to compete with that? I make no bones about this. I rarely watched Cal basketball last year. The train wreck was obviously coming regardless of the coach. Jones was honest with alums about where we were at (and it should have been very obvious to anyone with two neurons to rub together).

Jones made us worse. Given the limitations of the roster, he needed to play to their strengths rather than try and put in his system. He flailed as anyone should have expected an inexperienced and unprepared coach to do. He made many, many huge mistakes. He didn't ever seem to have a coherent system. All of which probably just made the scope of the losses worse. I frankly doubt that hiring a reasonable coach like Monty would have changed the overall record. Sometimes you don't have the horses.

If you think Wyking Jones lead Cal basketball to this point you are insane. Cal basketball was a ten foot high pile of steaming cow dung that Jones just happened to choose to sit on to rest for a spell. I certainly do not believe Jones is the guy to clean up the mess. I certainly do think we need to move on unless he miraculously turns into something I don't believe he is. But to make him morally culpable like you are doing and to make it a personal issue just makes you a baby. I have no idea whether Jones is a good guy or a bad guy. But I know he is not a bad guy for failing to take an awful roster and win basketball games.

. 2-17 (worst ever in the California history) in Pac-12. Dead last in Pac-12. Most losses ever in Pac-12. Most losses ever in one season. Most embarrassing double digit losses ever

Enough said.

Bring Back Respect To Cal Basketball!

Go Bears!

If you want credibility here, then you need to get your facts straight.

First, Cal's record in the PAC-12 last season was 2-16, not 2-17. It is the worst record in Cal history in the PAC-12, but you make it sound like that is a big deal. The PAC-12 has only been in existence for 7 years, so that is not very much history. Prior to that time, Cal's conferences had fewer teams and smaller conference schedules, so it wasn't realistic to have as many losses as Cal had last season.

Second, in Cal's history, Cal has had two teams with worse conference records than last season's record of 2-16, a 11.1% winning percentage. In 1949, Cal under Nibs Price went 1-11 in conference, and in 1955, Cal under Pete Newell went 1-11 in conference, both a 8.3% winning percentage. I have argued before that the 1955 Cal team was a much bigger disappointment, because Newell had won a national championship (NIT) 6 years previous, and his '55 Cal team started All-American Bob McKeen and future All-American, Larry Friend, along with fine players like Bob Blake and Mike Diaz.

When you say that Cal "had the most losses ever in the PAC-12," did you mean in Cal's history or in PAC-12 history? Three schools have had worse records than Cal in PAC-12 history, finishing 1-17: OSU (2017), WSU (2016), and USC (2012). And USC has finished dead last in the PAC-12 three times, 2012, 2014, and 2015.

When you say that in 2018, Cal "had the most losses ever in one season," that is not quite fair either, because Cal and most teams play many more games in a season now than in the years before the shot clock was introduced in 1985-86. So it is possible to lose (or win) more games now than prior to 1985-86.

There were a lot of embarrassing double-digit losses. Chaminade was probably the worst, and the 30 point losses to Utah and ASU were awful. But nothing in all my years can compare to the 51-point blowout to Stanford in Maples in 2000 under Ben Braun. Stanford was a very good team, but Cal was not chopped liver, with Lampley, Shipp, Wethers, Van der Laan, Gates, Legans, Solomon Hughes, and Forehan-Kelly.

For me, there have been much more disappointing seasons than 2018 under a first year coach: 1962, when Cal had been NCAA runner-up the year before, and returned starters McClintock, Schulz, and Wendell, plus Dave Stafford, Stan Morrison, Dick Smith, Cam Wall, and Don Lauer. They had a new coach, Rene Herrerias, and I had bought Final Four tickets before the season even started. Cal finished 5-7 in the conference, 13-9 overall.

I already mentioned 1955. And the season when Campy was fired was disappointing, not in the record, but just the way it happened. The year that Bozeman got cheating was much worse than anything Wyking Jones did last season, and much more damaging to the Cal basketball program for years going forward. I thought Cuonzo Martin's first season was lousy, considering the talent he had: Wallace, Kravish, Bird, and Mathews.

The point is Cal had a bad season, but as everyone else here has said, Wyking Jones had very little to work with. Almost none of us, except you perhaps, and Jones himself, had any real positive expectations for last season. He did not look good doing it, I agree, and a more experienced coach could perhaps have done a little better. McNeill and Sueing were bright spots, and I don't think very many fans expected them to be as good as they were. Now, Jones has recruited more scorers to help put more points up, and he has recruited a legitimate point guard to get the ball to them. Where Jones may have failed is to land more talent up front to protect the rim and get rebounds. So Cal is likely to improve their personnel, and maybe their record. I think they will play small, and be more fun to watch, and I hope you can settle for that, and let the season play out to determine whether Jones stays or leaves.

Factual and solid post, to judge WJ on last season is simply unfair and unreasonable. No coach would have done much different, given the lack of an point guard, inexperience, and below average talent. I have gotten to know coach well and if he is given his 3rd year of his contract, I believe we will see an upper division conference team that will be playing in the post season. Watching a recent practice, a few observations: team will be noticeably better (though still an 9th place team due to very limited/undersized front court), team chemistry much better, better hands on coaching from the new key assistants in Wilson and Grace. Coach is much more comfortable in his role and having his own assistants (versus the situation he inherited) will result in trust, consistent approach and much better results. The weakness is lack of consistent outside shooting - Dyson, McNeil, Austin are excellent athletes, but erratic shooters. Sueling is noticeably stronger/quicker and has slightly upgraded his outside shot. Turning around a program that was left in shambles and becoming a post season contender usually takes 3 seasons and reasonable basketball followers understand this. Go Bears!

calbear80 has no credibility to undermine. Each post he makes only serves to confirm that he is a one trick pony with an ax or two to grind. I'm guessing Wyking stole his girlfriend in high school or something.

For many years, my wife and I commuted together on BART to work and back each day. To her chagrin, I was the guy that would always engage the downtrodden people, when the entire crowd would not even acknowledge their existence. Despite our merits and shortcomings, we are ALL human. Even the most loathsome deserve some human discourse.

That is, until they become too annoying. Then we can just block them. I'm not there yet - probably because it is mid-August and there is nothing else going on.

Factual and solid post, to judge WJ on last season is simply unfair and unreasonable. No coach would have done much different, given the lack of an point guard, inexperience, and below average talent. I have gotten to know coach well and if he is given his 3rd year of his contract, I believe we will see an upper division conference team that will be playing in the post season. Watching a recent practice, a few observations: team will be noticeably better (though still an 9th place team due to very limited/undersized front court), team chemistry much better, better hands on coaching from the new key assistants in Wilson and Grace. Coach is much more comfortable in his role and having his own assistants (versus the situation he inherited) will result in trust, consistent approach and much better results. The weakness is lack of consistent outside shooting - Dyson, McNeil, Austin are excellent athletes, but erratic shooters. Sueling is noticeably stronger/quicker and has slightly upgraded his outside shot. Turning around a program that was left in shambles and becoming a post season contender usually takes 3 seasons and reasonable basketball followers understand this. Go Bears!

It is good to read all your comments from personal experience watching practice and getting to know Wyking Jones. Very positive, and thanks.

Any coach needs to have all his own assistants and all his own players in place for a year or two to be fairly judged. Last season Jones had a few of Cuonzo's players (one who was hard to control) and he will have one Cuonzo player, Roman Davis, through this season and next season as well. So I think it could take 4 years for Cal to be really good and challenge for the PAC12 title. I base that on the fact that Cal has a very thin front court, and it usually takes big players until their junior season to contribute a lot. That is Cal's big weakness. Unless freshmen Vanover and Kelly are unusually mature for their age, or unless we see a breakthrough from Davis or Anticevich, this is going to be a struggle to protect the basket, guard the big posts in the half court, and be competitive on the boards. That being said, I don't like using a full court press with young inexperienced players, but I think this season is a better season to try it than it was last season. Last season, we had the conference's best shot blocker, Okoroh, along with Lee, so there was no real danger of getting killed inside in the half court, so trying a full court press was risky and it failed. But this year we have nothing but question marks and hope inside, and it would seem worth the risk to play small and press full court, to keep ourselves out of having to defend all game long in the half-court.

I don't see shooting as being the weakness it was last year. I don't agree on Dyson being erratic (I think he hasn't shown he can shoot at all). As far as McNeill goes, he was not erratic last season, IMO. He had two distinct seasons the first 17 games, where he shot threes at 46%, which is excellent, and last 15 games, where he shot threes at 28%. He was a freshman, not used to playing point guard, and I think he hit a wall in the PAC12, like freshman can do. Not to mention the distractions with Coleman, and the losing games. It is a long season, and the pressure builds as the season goes along. I also noticed that he shot a lot more threes in the last 15 games (112) vs the first 17 games (78). Perhaps the coaches were urging him to shoot more given all the losing games. McNeill should be more consistent in both halves of the season this season, as sophomores usually are. What I would question is will he be as good a shooter without having the ball, and having to wait for someone else to pass it to him? Can he catch and shoot?

Coleman is gone, and he was not a good shooter. We've added Gordon, Bradley, and Kelly, all of whom look good shooting in their videos. All three of these players look like they can shoot inside and outside, and in the midrange area. It remains to see if they can do it against experienced D1 players guarding them. I am also interesting in seeing James Zhao, who was the star shooter on China's Under 17 National team a few years ago. He averaged 22 points and several assists over the first 4 games in the U17 World Championships, until he ran into a superior USA team, which focused on stopping him, and held him to 11 points.

As for Paris Austin, erratic shooting is typical of many good point guards. From his videos, it looks like he can quarterback a team, make decisions, start plays, penetrate, and set up his teammates for easy buckets. That is what I care about most, not whether he can shoot. His videos show a dazzling array of no-look passes, a la Jerome Randle's high school videos, so my one question about him now is can he play defense?

I guess I'd say I won't predict anything, but I am getting a little juiced about this season coming up. (And I gave up the sauce years ago, so my getting juiced here is all about Cal basketball)

I agree with SFCity as to to size. Unless, that is, WJ recruits a couple big studs, we will continue to be lacking inside for some time to come. Cause I don't see Steph and Klay bombing from 3 on this squad.

One Rx for the "size problem" after this season is that Anticevich, Kelly and Vanover turn out to be pretty good and get better next year. Gordon will be healthy and 6-7, 225. Maybe mix in a grad transfer and/or another decent recruit (provided we get those schollies back).

We're talking about Matz Stockman, who first played at Louisville, then transferred to Minnesota where he sat out last season (2017-2018) with the Gophers. He said he was coming to Cal publicly. But now he's going to remain at Minnesota. As of today, Tue. Aug. 7th.

Are you thinking about the other grad transfer, the really good one, from the mid-major that was considering Cal, but just decided to stay and never publicly said he was going to come to Cal?

That was the old big man transfer disappointment. This is the new big man transfer disappointment, just breaking today.

Isn't this the really tall skinny guy who averaged less than 2 points per game and looked really slow in his video? Let's not pretend like we just lost Hakeem Olajuwon or something. Losing the HS kid to Reno was a kick in the sack. This? Meh.

Factual and solid post, to judge WJ on last season is simply unfair and unreasonable. No coach would have done much different, given the lack of an point guard, inexperience, and below average talent. I have gotten to know coach well and if he is given his 3rd year of his contract, I believe we will see an upper division conference team that will be playing in the post season. Watching a recent practice, a few observations: team will be noticeably better (though still an 9th place team due to very limited/undersized front court), team chemistry much better, better hands on coaching from the new key assistants in Wilson and Grace. Coach is much more comfortable in his role and having his own assistants (versus the situation he inherited) will result in trust, consistent approach and much better results. The weakness is lack of consistent outside shooting - Dyson, McNeil, Austin are excellent athletes, but erratic shooters. Sueling is noticeably stronger/quicker and has slightly upgraded his outside shot. Turning around a program that was left in shambles and becoming a post season contender usually takes 3 seasons and reasonable basketball followers understand this. Go Bears!

coach Jones might want to try to win on the court of public opinion as he loses on the court itself. He could do this by advertising his hard work on the recruiting trail (while not discussing names), or by sharing more workouts and developments. He could more broadly pitch his tactics.

I imagine someone will say, "you'd know if you were an insider", and if he thinks that's working for him, then god bless him.

Factual and solid post, to judge WJ on last season is simply unfair and unreasonable. No coach would have done much different, given the lack of an point guard, inexperience, and below average talent. I have gotten to know coach well and if he is given his 3rd year of his contract, I believe we will see an upper division conference team that will be playing in the post season. Watching a recent practice, a few observations: team will be noticeably better (though still an 9th place team due to very limited/undersized front court), team chemistry much better, better hands on coaching from the new key assistants in Wilson and Grace. Coach is much more comfortable in his role and having his own assistants (versus the situation he inherited) will result in trust, consistent approach and much better results. The weakness is lack of consistent outside shooting - Dyson, McNeil, Austin are excellent athletes, but erratic shooters. Sueling is noticeably stronger/quicker and has slightly upgraded his outside shot. Turning around a program that was left in shambles and becoming a post season contender usually takes 3 seasons and reasonable basketball followers understand this. Go Bears!

coach Jones might want to try to win on the court of public opinion as he loses on the court itself. He could do this by advertising his hard work on the recruiting trail (while not discussing names), or by sharing more workouts and developments. He could more broadly pitch his tactics.

I imagine someone will say, "you'd know if you were an insider", and if he thinks that's working for him, then god bless him.

As for me, I haven't heard or seen him since our last loss.

If you what you are trying to sell is that Cal will play in the style of Louisville, the less said the better.

Factual and solid post, to judge WJ on last season is simply unfair and unreasonable. No coach would have done much different, given the lack of an point guard, inexperience, and below average talent. I have gotten to know coach well and if he is given his 3rd year of his contract, I believe we will see an upper division conference team that will be playing in the post season. Watching a recent practice, a few observations: team will be noticeably better (though still an 9th place team due to very limited/undersized front court), team chemistry much better, better hands on coaching from the new key assistants in Wilson and Grace. Coach is much more comfortable in his role and having his own assistants (versus the situation he inherited) will result in trust, consistent approach and much better results. The weakness is lack of consistent outside shooting - Dyson, McNeil, Austin are excellent athletes, but erratic shooters. Sueling is noticeably stronger/quicker and has slightly upgraded his outside shot. Turning around a program that was left in shambles and becoming a post season contender usually takes 3 seasons and reasonable basketball followers understand this. Go Bears!

It is good to read all your comments from personal experience watching practice and getting to know Wyking Jones. Very positive, and thanks.

Any coach needs to have all his own assistants and all his own players in place for a year or two to be fairly judged. Last season Jones had a few of Cuonzo's players (one who was hard to control) and he will have one Cuonzo player, Roman Davis, through this season and next season as well. So I think it could take 4 years for Cal to be really good and challenge for the PAC12 title. I base that on the fact that Cal has a very thin front court, and it usually takes big players until their junior season to contribute a lot. That is Cal's big weakness. Unless freshmen Vanover and Kelly are unusually mature for their age, or unless we see a breakthrough from Davis or Anticevich, this is going to be a struggle to protect the basket, guard the big posts in the half court, and be competitive on the boards. That being said, I don't like using a full court press with young inexperienced players, but I think this season is a better season to try it than it was last season. Last season, we had the conference's best shot blocker, Okoroh, along with Lee, so there was no real danger of getting killed inside in the half court, so trying a full court press was risky and it failed. But this year we have nothing but question marks and hope inside, and it would seem worth the risk to play small and press full court, to keep ourselves out of having to defend all game long in the half-court.

I don't see shooting as being the weakness it was last year. I don't agree on Dyson being erratic (I think he hasn't shown he can shoot at all). As far as McNeill goes, he was not erratic last season, IMO. He had two distinct seasons the first 17 games, where he shot threes at 46%, which is excellent, and last 15 games, where he shot threes at 28%. He was a freshman, not used to playing point guard, and I think he hit a wall in the PAC12, like freshman can do. Not to mention the distractions with Coleman, and the losing games. It is a long season, and the pressure builds as the season goes along. I also noticed that he shot a lot more threes in the last 15 games (112) vs the first 17 games (78). Perhaps the coaches were urging him to shoot more given all the losing games. McNeill should be more consistent in both halves of the season this season, as sophomores usually are. What I would question is will he be as good a shooter without having the ball, and having to wait for someone else to pass it to him? Can he catch and shoot?

Coleman is gone, and he was not a good shooter. We've added Gordon, Bradley, and Kelly, all of whom look good shooting in their videos. All three of these players look like they can shoot inside and outside, and in the midrange area. It remains to see if they can do it against experienced D1 players guarding them. I am also interesting in seeing James Zhao, who was the star shooter on China's Under 17 National team a few years ago. He averaged 22 points and several assists over the first 4 games in the U17 World Championships, until he ran into a superior USA team, which focused on stopping him, and held him to 11 points.

As for Paris Austin, erratic shooting is typical of many good point guards. From his videos, it looks like he can quarterback a team, make decisions, start plays, penetrate, and set up his teammates for easy buckets. That is what I care about most, not whether he can shoot. His videos show a dazzling array of no-look passes, a la Jerome Randle's high school videos, so my one question about him now is can he play defense?

I guess I'd say I won't predict anything, but I am getting a little juiced about this season coming up. (And I gave up the sauce years ago, so my getting juiced here is all about Cal basketball)

I can see getting jazzed about the offense, with a new point and guys who can shoot. But there is very little I expect from the frosh on defense, or without experienced bigs, and we be getting killed on the boards as well. Surprised to see anything over 10 wins and a last place (or second to last) finish in conference. Not getting me juiced about wins.

I can see getting jazzed about the offense, with a new point and guys who can shoot. But there is very little I expect from the frosh on defense, or without experienced bigs, and we be getting killed on the boards as well. Surprised to see anything over 10 wins and a last place (or second to last) finish in conference. Not getting me juiced about wins.

Agree. Taking a 2-win conference team, losing leading scorer & our two experienced big men doesn't seem like a recipe for success.

I guess I'd say I won't predict anything, but I am getting a little juiced about this season coming up. (And I gave up the sauce years ago, so my getting juiced here is all about Cal basketball)

You may have given up the sauce, but it seems you are drinking the Kool-Aid now. While I don't share your optimism, I appreciate that you are excited about the upcoming season. I wish I was.

Good thought. Perhaps I should not have said "juiced", as I'm more than a little interested, but not yet "optimistic," or "excited."

I'm interested in seeing the new players and what they can do, and interested to see if they can play well together. I'm interested in seeing if the returning players have improved in any way. I'm interested in seeing if Wyking Jones can coach any better than what he showed last season, whether he can change the things he was using and pushing last season which did not work and use a different style of play more suitable to his personnel, and keep those features of his coaching which seemed to work well, if there were any. If he is going to use a full court press a lot, the only way that works is the opponent needs to be starting his offense after Cal makes a basket or a free throw, and so Cal will need to shoot the ball better themselves, and reduce their own turnovers.

I'm also interested in whether he and his assistants (some who are new) can get his players to improve individually over this season, something I saw little of that last season. If we do start losing big like last season, they will lose me like they did last season. Last season, the team had a lot of "quit" in it. It began in the 2nd half of the Wichita State game, and continued. Cal was able to start most games well enough to stay with their opponents, but they they looked like they just gave up. I know what that is like. I played on a couple of teams which did that, and I hated it. If they start doing that again this year, I'm done with this coach. In that case, he can learn to be a head coach somewhere else, not at Cal.

I'm excited about the upcoming season, too (for all the reasons SFCity cited). Of course, if we're winning way less than half our games (and, especially, just generally performing poorly, a la last year), that enthusiasm is going to wear off rather quickly.

But for now, I'm pumped to see how the freshman look and how the sophomores have improved. If we look REASONABLY well-coached, if we win more than most people expect (bar is set low there) and if we still seem to be drawing good recruits, the excitement will continue.